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 .
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.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Between paragraphs 128 and 129, item “380” is referred to as “pressure regulating device (380)”, “valve (380)”, and “temperature regulating device (380)”. For the purpose of consistency, the Examiner request the Applicant amend the specification to consistently refer to item “380” by a singular name, the Examiner further recommends consistency of naming to be used throughout the specification when referring to items identified by the same number in the figures.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, lines 2-3: “an at least one recuperator therein” should read “an at least one recuperator in the at least one cold plate assembly”
Claim 1, line 3: “having highly transient thermal loads thereon” should read “having highly transient thermal loads on the at least one cold plate assembly”
Claim 2, lines 6-7: "the additional flow restriction" should read "the additional flow restriction
or the orifice"
Claim 2, line 7: “each parallel passage” should read “each parallel passage of the multiple parallel passages”
Claim 4, line 3: both recitations of “the cold plate module” should read “the at least one cold plate module”
Claim 5, line 3: both recitations of “the cold plate module” should read “the at least one cold plate module”
Claim 6, line 3: “the cold plate module” should read “the at least one cold plate module”
Claim 6, lines 4-5: “the cold plate module” should read “the at least one cold plate module”
Claim 6, line 6: “the cold plate module” should read “the at least one cold plate module”
Claim 7, line 4: “the cold plate module” should read “the at least one cold plate module”
Claims 2-10 are also objected to by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
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:
Claim 5, line 4: “temperature regulating device” draws corresponding structure to the following recitation of the present disclosure, “The pressure regulating device (380), which can be an electrically activated valve controlled by the control module, opens and closes as needed to control the pressure of stream (540) and thus the evaporating temperature (saturation temperature) of the cold plate refrigerant stream (510)… a temperature regulating device (380) (Pg. 27, paragraph 128-129)”, or equivalents thereof.
Claim 6, line 4: “pressure regulating device” draws corresponding structure to the following recitation of the present disclosure, “The pressure regulating device (380), which can be an electrically activated valve controlled by the control module, opens and closes as needed to control the pressure of stream (540) and thus the evaporating temperature (saturation temperature) of the cold plate refrigerant stream (510) (Pg. 27, paragraph 128)”, or equivalents thereof.
Claim 7, line 4: “pressure regulating device” draws corresponding structure to the following recitation of the present disclosure, “The pressure regulating device (380), which can be an electrically activated valve controlled by the control module, opens and closes as needed to control the pressure of stream (540) and thus the evaporating temperature (saturation temperature) of the cold plate refrigerant stream (510) (Pg. 27, paragraph 128)”, or equivalents thereof.
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
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 1-10 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the working fluid" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the working fluid" in line 7 of claim 1 to "the compressed higher-pressure fluid" which is given proper antecedent basis in lines 6-7 of claim 1. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim as recommended herein.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the heat load" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the heat load" in line 9 of claim 1 to "a heat load".
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the inlet of the compressor" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the inlet of the compressor” in line 10 of claim 1 to “an inlet of the compressor”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the compressor suction" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the compressor suction” in line 12 of claim 1 to “a compressor suction”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the compressor discharge" in lines 12-13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the compressor discharge” in lines 12-13 of claim 1 to “a compressor discharge”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the speed" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the speed” in line 13 of claim 1 to “a speed”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the superheat" in lines 15-16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the superheat” in lines 15-16 of claim 1 to “a superheat”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the exit pressure" in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the exit pressure” in line 17 of claim 1 to “an exit pressure”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the low pressure" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the low pressure” in line 18 of claim 1 to “a low pressure”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the at least one cold plate module with multiple parallel passages" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “at least one cold plate module with multiple parallel passages" in lines 2-3 of claim 2 to “the at least one cold plate module wherein the at least one cold plate module includes multiple parallel passages” to clearly indicate the at least one cold plate module and the at least one cold plate module with multiple parallel passages are the same components. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim as recommended herein.
The term "near" in claim 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "near" 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. The degree to which the working fluid flow rate between each parallel passage is uniform is rendered indefinite by the use of the term "near". For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret near to mean within 10%.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the fluid" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the fluid" in line 3 of claim 3 to "the working fluid".
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the inlet of the cold plate module" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the inlet of the cold plate module” in line 3 of claim 5 to “an inlet of the cold plate module”.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the low pressure stream" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the low pressure stream” in line 5 of claim 5 to “a low pressure stream”.
Claim 6, line 2 recites, "the partial or complete opening and closing of the valve" which is unclear to the Examiner if the adjustment includes only partial opening of the valve, a partial closing of the valve, both a partial opening of the valve and a partial closing of the valve, complete opening of the valve, complete closing of the valve, or both a complete opening of the valve and a complete closing of the valve. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to include any adjustment of the valve.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the valve" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the valve” in line 3 of claim 6 to “a valve”.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the discharge of the cold plate module" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the discharge of the cold plate module” in line 3 of claim 6 to “a discharge of the cold plate module”.
Claim 7, lines 2-3 recite, " wherein the recuperator includes a cold fluid stream and a hot fluid stream that freely exchange heat across a solid boundary" which is unclear to the Examiner as to how heat exchanger occurs freely (i.e., uninhibited) across a solid boundary as the solid boundary would inhibit heat exchanger to some degree. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to simply require heat exchange between the cold fluid stream and the hot fluid stream within the recuperator heat exchanger.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the pressure regulating device" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the pressure regulating device” in line 4 of claim 7 to “a pressure regulating device”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the fluid" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the fluid" in line 5 of claim 7 to "the working fluid".
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the refrigerant flow path" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the refrigerant flow path" in line 2 of claim 8 to "a refrigerant flow path".
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the flow path" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the flow path" in line 3 of claim 8 to "the refrigerant flow path".
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the refrigerant flow path" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the refrigerant flow path" in line 2 of claim 9 to "a refrigerant flow path".
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the flow path" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the flow path" in line 3 of claim 9 to "the refrigerant flow path".
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the refrigerant flow path" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the refrigerant flow path" in line 2 of claim 10 to "a refrigerant flow path".
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the flow path" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the flow path" in line 3 of claim 10 to "the refrigerant flow path".
Claims 2-10 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swain et aI. (US 20230026371), hereinafter Swain in view of Vaisman et al. (US 20220390149), hereinafter Vaisman and Unton et al. (US 20220357082), hereinafter Unton.
Regarding claim 1, Swain discloses a process of maintaining a uniform isothermal temperature distribution on an at least one cold plate assembly (Fig. 8, cold plate 116, high heat load 118, low heat load 120, solenoid valve 112, recuperative heat exchanger 122; Pg. 4, paragraph 59, herein use a modified evaporator design that maintains even refrigerant distribution to refrigerate heat loads and maintain temperature of those heat loads with defined temperature ranges), having an at least one cold plate module (Fig. 8, cold plate 116), an at least one control valve (Fig. 8, solenoid valve 112), and an at least one recuperator therein (Fig. 8, recuperative heat exchanger 122), having highly transient thermal loads thereon (Fig. 8, high heat load 118, low heat load 120) by utilizing a vapor compression apparatus (Fig. 8, TMS 800)) having a supply line (Fig. 8, inlet 121) and a return line (Fig. 8, outlet 123) connected to the at least one cold plate assembly and using a compressor to draw a vapor working fluid from the at least one cold plate assembly in order to compress the vapor working fluid and supply a compressed higher-pressure fluid (Fig. 8, compressor 104; Pg. 10, paragraph 127, In the closed-circuit refrigeration configuration, circulating refrigerant enters the compressor 104 as a saturated or superheated vapor and is compressed to a higher pressure at a higher temperature (a superheated vapor)) to a condenser and the condenser to condense the working fluid to a liquid (Fig. 8, condenser 106; Pg. 10, paragraph 127, This superheated vapor is at a temperature and pressure at which it can be condensed in the condenser 106 by either cooling water 126 or cooling air 126 flowing across a coil or tubes in the condenser 106) that flows to the at least one cold plate assembly via the supply line and evaporates in the at least one cold plate module to remove the heat load supplied to the at least one cold plate module from the highly transient thermal loads (Pg. 11, paragraph 129, The heat from the low heat load 120 in contact with or proximate to the cold plate 116 partially or completely evaporates the liquid portion of the two-phase refrigerant mixture, and may superheat the mixture), and returning a lower-pressure fluid vapor to the inlet of the compressor via the return line (Pg. 11, paragraph 129, The refrigerant leaves the cold plate 116 and enters the suction accumulator 124. The saturated or superheated vapor exits the outlet 127 of the suction accumulator 124 and enters the compressor 104), the process comprising:
adjusting the flow of fluid and the exit pressure through the at least one cold plate module and the low pressure in the at least one recuperator to maintain a desired a flow rate and an inlet temperature into the at least one cold plate module to accommodate varying heat loads (Pg. 11, paragraph 136, The cold plate 116 operates in two phase (liquid/gas) for high heat load 118 and superheated regions for low heat load 120 with controlled superheat. The sensor-controlled expansion valve 114 and the sensor 134 provide a mechanism to measure and control superheat; Pg. 19, paragraph 218, Any two of the optional devices, as pressure sensors, upstream and downstream from a control device, can be configured to measure information about a pressure differential Pr-Pe across the respective control device and to transmit electronic signals corresponding to the measured pressure from which a pressure difference information can be generated by the control system 999. Other sensors such as flow sensors and temperature sensors can be used as well. In certain embodiments, sensors can be replaced by a single pressure differential sensor, a first end of which is connected adjacent to an inlet and a second end of which is connected adjacent to an outlet of a device to which differential pressure is to be measured, such as the evaporator. The pressure differential sensor measures and transmits information about the refrigerant fluid pressure drop across the device, e.g., the cold plate 116; Further, the teachings of Swain at least imply adjusting the flow of fluid and the exit pressure through the at least one cold plate module and the low pressure in the at least one recuperator to maintain a desired a flow rate and an inlet temperature into the at least one cold plate module to accommodate varying heat loads since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)).
However, Swain does not disclose adjusting a bypass of fluid flow directly back to the compressor suction from the compressor discharge or adjusting the speed of the compressor to maintain a necessary compressor suction pressure responding to varying flow demands from the cold plate assembly.
Vaisman teaches adjusting a bypass of fluid flow directly back to the compressor suction from the compressor discharge (Fig. 2, compressor bypass circuit 204; Pg. 8, paragraph 112, An alternative arrangement of a CCRS 202 that enables bypassing refrigerant fluid through the compressor 104 is shown through the implementation of the compressor bypass circuit 204, with the compressor 104 OFF to avoid a pressure drop produced by the compressor 104 when off. The CCRS 202 bypasses the compressor 104 by routing refrigerant through a bypass conduit 206 of the compressor bypass circuit 204, as well as by through a pair of check valves 210 and an optional solenoid control valve 208. Some embodiments may include a suction accumulator 122 at the outlet 123 of the evaporator 116).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of Swain to include the step or limitation of adjusting a bypass of fluid flow directly back to the compressor suction from the compressor discharge as taught by Vaisman. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to maintain a desired fluid pressure in the system to improve overall system efficiencies (Vaisman, Pg. 8, paragraph 112).
Further, Swain as modified does not disclose adjusting a bypass of fluid flow around the at least one cold plate assembly to control the superheat at the compressor suction.
Unton teaches adjusting a bypass of fluid flow around the at least one cold plate assembly to control the superheat at the compressor suction (Fig. 1, recycle line 150; Pg. 4-5, paragraph 40, The cooling fluid may flow from the outlet of the compressor 122, to the recycle line 150, through the fourth control valve 128 (also referred to as a superheat control valve), and back upstream of the inlet of the compressor 122, between the inlet of the compressor 122 and the vapor outlet 146 of the receiver 104. The fourth control valve 128 may control the rate of cooling fluid flowing through the recycle line 150. For example, when less cooling is needed for the heat load 102, the compressor 122 and the VCS loop 138 may be turned down. The fourth control valve 128 may be opened and the recycle line 150 may recirculate the cooling fluid from the compressor 122 outlet to the compressor 122 inlet to keep the compressor 122 running and to provide enough vapor when the heat load rejection is not hot enough).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of Swain as modified to include the step or limitation of adjusting a bypass of fluid flow around the at least one cold plate assembly to control the superheat at the compressor suction as taught by Unton. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in
order to keep the compressor running and to provide enough vapor when the heat load rejection is not
hot enough (Unton, Pg. 5, paragraph 40).
Regarding claim 3, Swain as modified further discloses the process of claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above), further comprising:
in response to a difference between a measured flowrate and a desired flowrate, adjusting the flow rate of the fluid by modulating an orifice size within a proportional expansion valve (Swain, Fig. 8, expansion valve 114; Pg. 8, An operator can set the flow rates and the valve open or close positions for all flow control systems distributed across the facility using the control system. In such embodiments, the operator can manually change the flow conditions by providing inputs through the control system. Also, in such embodiments, the control system can automatically (that is, without manual intervention) control one or more of the flow control systems, for example, using feedback systems connected to the control system. For example, a sensor (such as a pressure sensor, temperature sensor or other sensor) can be connected to a pipe through which a fluid flows. The sensor can monitor and provide a flow condition (such as a pressure, temperature, or other flow condition) of the process stream to the control system. In response to the flow condition exceeding a threshold (such as a threshold pressure value, a threshold temperature value, or other threshold value), the control system can automatically perform operations; Pg. 9, paragraph 110, For example, in some embodiments, expansion valve 114 can be implemented as a fixed orifice, a capillary tube, and/or a mechanical or electronic expansion valve; Pg. 11, paragraph 138, The expansion valve 114 can be operated with the sensor 134 (as discussed) that controls the expansion valve 114 either directly or indirectly via the control system 999; Pg. 13, paragraph 153, In TMS 800, expansion valve 114 is generally configured to control the vapor quality of the refrigerant fluid emerging from cold plate 116. As an example, expansion valve 114 regulates the mass flow rate of the refrigerant fluid through the valve 114. In tum, for a given set of operating conditions (e.g., ambient temperature), initial pressure in the receiver 110, temperature set point value for high heat load 118, the vapor quality determines mass flow rate of the refrigerant fluid emerging from cold plate 116. Expansion valve 114 typically controls the vapor quality of the refrigerant fluid emerging from cold plate 116 in response to information about at least one thermodynamic quantity that is either directly or indirectly related to the vapor quality. In general, a wide variety of different measurement and control strategies can be implemented in TMS 800 to achieve the control objectives; Further, the teachings of Swain at least imply adjusting the flow rate of the fluid by modulating an orifice size within a proportional expansion valve in response to a difference between a measured flowrate and a desired flowrate since it has been held it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)).
Regarding claim 4, Swain as modified further discloses the process of claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above), further comprising:
in response to a difference between a measured pressure and a desired pressure at the outlet of the cold plate module, adjusting the outlet pressure of the cold plate module by modulating an orifice size within a pressure regulating device (Swain, Fig. 8, expansion valve 114; Pg. 8, An operator can set the flow rates and the valve open or close positions for all flow control systems distributed across the facility using the control system. In such embodiments, the operator can manually change the flow conditions by providing inputs through the control system. Also, in such embodiments, the control system can automatically (that is, without manual intervention) control one or more of the flow control systems, for example, using feedback systems connected to the control system. For example, a sensor (such as a pressure sensor, temperature sensor or other sensor) can be connected to a pipe through which a fluid flows. The sensor can monitor and provide a flow condition (such as a pressure, temperature, or other flow condition) of the process stream to the control system. In response to the flow condition exceeding a threshold (such as a threshold pressure value, a threshold temperature value, or other threshold value), the control system can automatically perform operations; Pg. 9, paragraph 110, For example, in some embodiments, expansion valve 114 can be implemented as a fixed orifice, a capillary tube, and/or a mechanical or electronic expansion valve; Pg. 11, paragraph 138, The expansion valve 114 can be operated with the sensor 134 (as discussed) that controls the expansion valve 114 either directly or indirectly via the control system 999; Pg. 13, paragraph 153, In TMS 800, expansion valve 114 is generally configured to control the vapor quality of the refrigerant fluid emerging from cold plate 116. As an example, expansion valve 114 regulates the mass flow rate of the refrigerant fluid through the valve 114. In tum, for a given set of operating conditions (e.g., ambient temperature), initial pressure in the receiver 110, temperature set point value for high heat load 118, the vapor quality determines mass flow rate of the refrigerant fluid emerging from cold plate 116. Expansion valve 114 typically controls the vapor quality of the refrigerant fluid emerging from cold plate 116 in response to information about at least one thermodynamic quantity that is either directly or indirectly related to the vapor quality. In general, a wide variety of different measurement and control strategies can be implemented in TMS 800 to achieve the control objectives; Pg. 19, paragraph 218, Any two of the optional devices, as pressure sensors, upstream and downstream from a control device, can be configured to measure information about a pressure differential Pr-Pe across the respective control device and to transmit electronic signals corresponding to the measured pressure from which a pressure difference information can be generated by the control system 999. Other sensors such as flow sensors and temperature sensors can be used as well. In certain embodiments, sensors can be replaced by a single pressure differential sensor, a first end of which is connected adjacent to an inlet and a second end of which is connected adjacent to an outlet of a device to which differential pressure is to be measured, such as the evaporator. The pressure differential sensor measures and transmits information about the refrigerant fluid pressure drop across the device, e.g., the cold plate 116; Further, the teachings of Swain at least imply adjusting the outlet pressure of the cold plate module by modulating an orifice size within a pressure regulating device in response to a difference between a measured pressure and a desired pressure at the outlet of the cold plate module since it has been held it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)).
Regarding claim 5, Swain as modified further discloses the process of claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above), further comprising:
in response to a difference between a measured temperature and a desired temperature at the inlet of the cold plate module, adjusting the inlet temperature of the cold plate module by modulating an orifice size within a temperature regulating device by using a pressure valve located in the low pressure stream within the recuperator (Swain, Fig. 8, expansion valve 114; Pg. 8, An operator can set the flow rates and the valve open or close positions for all flow control systems distributed across the facility using the control system. In such embodiments, the operator can manually change the flow conditions by providing inputs through the control system. Also, in such embodiments, the control system can automatically (that is, without manual intervention) control one or more of the flow control systems, for example, using feedback systems connected to the control system. For example, a sensor (such as a pressure sensor, temperature sensor or other sensor) can be connected to a pipe through which a fluid flows. The sensor can monitor and provide a flow condition (such as a pressure, temperature, or other flow condition) of the process stream to the control system. In response to the flow condition exceeding a threshold (such as a threshold pressure value, a threshold temperature value, or other threshold value), the control system can automatically perform operations; Pg. 9, paragraph 110, For example, in some embodiments, expansion valve 114 can be implemented as a fixed orifice, a capillary tube, and/or a mechanical or electronic expansion valve; Pg. 11, paragraph 138, The expansion valve 114 can be operated with the sensor 134 (as discussed) that controls the expansion valve 114 either directly or indirectly via the control system 999; Pg. 13, paragraph 153, In TMS 800, expansion valve 114 is generally configured to control the vapor quality of the refrigerant fluid emerging from cold plate 116. As an example, expansion valve 114 regulates the mass flow rate of the refrigerant fluid through the valve 114. In tum, for a given set of operating conditions (e.g., ambient temperature), initial pressure in the receiver 110, temperature set point value for high heat load 118, the vapor quality determines mass flow rate of the refrigerant fluid emerging from cold plate 116. Expansion valve 114 typically controls the vapor quality of the refrigerant fluid emerging from cold plate 116 in response to information about at least one thermodynamic quantity that is either directly or indirectly related to the vapor quality. In general, a wide variety of different measurement and control strategies can be implemented in TMS 800 to achieve the control objectives; Pg. 19, paragraph 218, Any two of the optional devices, as pressure sensors, upstream and downstream from a control device, can be configured to measure information about a pressure differential Pr-Pe across the respective control device and to transmit electronic signals corresponding to the measured pressure from which a pressure difference information can be generated by the control system 999. Other sensors such as flow sensors and temperature sensors can be used as well. In certain embodiments, sensors can be replaced by a single pressure differential sensor, a first end of which is connected adjacent to an inlet and a second end of which is connected adjacent to an outlet of a device to which differential pressure is to be measured, such as the evaporator. The pressure differential sensor measures and transmits information about the refrigerant fluid pressure drop across the device, e.g., the cold plate 116; Further, the teachings of Swain at least imply adjusting the inlet temperature of the cold plate module by modulating an orifice size within a temperature regulating device by using a pressure valve located in the low pressure stream within the recuperator in response to a difference between a measured temperature and a desired temperature at the inlet of the cold plate module since it has been held it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)).
Regarding claim 9, Swain as modified discloses the process of claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above), further comprising:
providing a liquid receiver (Swain, Fig. 8, receiver 110) in the refrigerant flow path, after the condenser and before the at least one cold plate in the flow path (Fig. 8 of Swain depicts receiver 110 disposed in the refrigerant flow path after condenser 106 and before cold plate 116), to increase short-term capacity of the system (Swain, Pg. 4, paragraph 63, Receiver 110 is typically implemented as an insulated vessel that stores a refrigerant fluid at relatively high pressure. When ambient temperature is very low and, as a result, pressure in the receiver 110 is low and insufficient to drive refrigerant fluid flow through the TMS 100, gas from gas receiver 10 can be directed into receiver 110. The gas compresses liquid refrigerant fluid 1 in receiver 110, maintaining the liquid refrigerant fluid 1 in a sub-cooled state, even when the ambient temperature and the temperature of the liquid refrigerant fluid are relatively high. Receiver 110 can also include insulation applied around the receiver 110 and a heater to reduce thermal losses).
Regarding claim 10, Swain as modified discloses the process of claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above), further comprising:
providing a suction line accumulator (Swain, Fig. 8, suction accumulator 124) in the refrigerant flow path, before the compressor in the flow path (Fig. 8 of Swain depicts suction accumulator 124 ) in the refrigerant flow path before compressor 104), to protect the compressor during rapid transients (Swain, Pg. 12, paragraph 140, The discussion below regarding vapor quality presumes that the recuperative heat exchanger 122 is configured to generate a sufficient superheat and is used with the suction accumulator 124 to avoid presence of liquid at the compressor inlet 101).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swain as modified by Vaisman and Unton as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Vaisman et al. (US 20220404081), hereinafter Vaisman ‘081.
Regarding claim 6, Swain as modified discloses the process of claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above).
However, Swain as modified does not disclose further comprising:
wherein the adjusting the saturation temperature of the at least one cold plate module is the partial or complete opening and closing of the valve at the discharge of the cold plate module, wherein increasing the opening of a pressure regulating device at the discharge of the cold plate module lowers the discharge pressure and lowers the saturation temperature and decreasing the opening of the valve at the discharge of the cold plate module increases the saturation temperature.
Vaisman ‘081 teaches wherein the adjusting the saturation temperature of the at least one cold plate module is the partial or complete opening and closing of the valve at the discharge of the cold plate module, wherein increasing the opening of a pressure regulating device at the discharge of the cold plate module lowers the discharge pressure and lowers the saturation temperature and decreasing the opening of the valve at the discharge of the cold plate module increases the saturation temperature (Fig. 5, solenoid control valve 128; Vaisman ‘081, Pg. 8, paragraph 97, If the heat loading is negligible or does not exist, the additional optional solenoid control valve 128 may stay closed to avoid pressure reduction in the evaporator 116. If the heat loading is small, the additional optional solenoid control valve 128 may be open to allow circulation of the evaporator 116 to cool the heat loads).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of Swain to include the step or limitation of wherein the adjusting the saturation temperature of the at least one cold plate module is the partial or complete opening and closing of the valve at the discharge of the cold plate module, wherein increasing the opening of a pressure regulating device at the discharge of the cold plate module lowers the discharge pressure and lowers the saturation temperature and decreasing the opening of the valve at the discharge of the cold plate module increases the saturation temperature as taught by Vaisman ‘081. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve overall system efficiency.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swain as modified by Vaisman and Unton as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Vaisman et al. (US 20220404105), hereinafter Vaisman ‘105
Regarding claim 8, Swain as modified discloses the process of claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above).
However, Swain as modified does not disclose further comprising:
providing a thermal storage device in the refrigerant flow path, either before or after the condenser in the flow path, to increase short-term capacity of the system.
Vaisman ‘105 teaches further comprising the step of:
providing a thermal storage device (Fig. 1, TES 128) in the refrigerant flow path, either before or after the condenser in the flow path (Fig. 1 of Vaisman ‘105 depicts TES 128 disposed in the refrigerant flow path after condenser 106), to increase short-term capacity of the system (Pg. 4, paragraph 66, The TES increases the cooling capacity of the TMS when a low heat load and/or a high heat load is activated).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of claim 1 to include a thermal storage device as taught by Vaisman ‘105. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to improve the cooling capacity of the system (Vaisman ‘105, Pg. 4, paragraph 66).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 2, the prior art of record does not disclose where each passage has an additional flow restriction or orifice to create a flow condition wherein the working fluid is a single phase fluid between a low-flow electrical-actuated valve, a high-flow electrical-actuated valve, and an integrated proportional expansion valve and the additional flow restriction to ensure a near uniform working fluid flow rate between each parallel passage, in combination with all other claimed features.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art of record does not disclose the recuperator operating such that the fluid downstream of the set expansion valves and upstream of an additional restriction is a single-phase liquid, in combination with all other claimed features.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Campbell et al. (US Patent No. 8,833,096) discloses a similar vapor-compression system for maintaining a uniform isothermal temperature distribution on an at least one cold plate with a recuperator that exchanges heat between a solid boundary.
Kim (US 20170254574) discloses a similar vapor-compression system for maintaining a uniform isothermal temperature distribution on an at least one cold plate.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVON T MOORE whose telephone number is 571-272-6555. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:30-5.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 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 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.
/DEVON MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 June 2nd, 2026
Prosecution Insights