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 .
Status
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 07/22/2026. The previous objections to the specification have been withdrawn. Furthermore, the previous 35 USC 112 rejections have also been withdrawn. Claims 15 and 21-36 remain pending for consideration.
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 15, 26, and 31-32 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 15 recites the limitation “the baffle wall” in line 33. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For examination purposes, the phrase “wherein the relief valve support wall and the baffle wall define opposite sides of a chamber” will be interpreted as -- wherein the relief valve support wall and a baffle wall define opposite sides of a chamber --
Claim 26 recites the limitation “a flow direction” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For examination purposes, the phrase “a flow direction across the evaporator” will be interpreted as -- the flow direction across the evaporator --
Claim 31 recites the limitation “moisture from the outside air” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For examination purposes, the phrase “turbulence that promotes freezing of moisture from the outside air” will be interpreted -- as turbulence that promotes freezing of the moisture from the outside air --
Regarding claim 32, the term “a majority” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “a majority of the moisture” 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. This term renders claim 32 indefinite because it is unclear what “a majority of the moisture in the outside air” is. Thus, as used to qualify the amount of moisture that freezes within the refrigeration system, this term renders the same indeterminate and the claim (and all claims depending therefrom) indefinite with regard to the scope of protection sought thereby.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 21-23, 31-32, and 35-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishio et al. (JP2010169346A, herein after referred to as Nishio).
Regarding claim 21, Nishio teaches a refrigerated storage (refrigerator Fig. 1) comprising; a cabinet (refrigerator body 10 Fig. 1) having an interior (storage compartment 11 Fig. 1) and an exterior (corresponds to the outer surface of refrigerator body 10 Fig. 1); a refrigeration system (refrigeration unit 23 Fig. 1) for cooling the interior of the cabinet (paragraph [0013]), the refrigeration system including an evaporator (cooler 26 Fig. 1) and an evaporator fan (interior fans 35 Fig. 1) configured to move cabinet air (corresponds to the disclosed “indoor air from the storage room 11” in paragraph [0013]) across the evaporator in a flow direction (cold air circulation flow A Fig. 1); a pressure relief valve (air intake pipe 41 Figs. 1 and 6) configured to open in response to a pressure of the interior of the cabinet (corresponds to the pressure inside storage compartment 11 as described in paragraph [0029]) being less than a pressure of the exterior of the cabinet (corresponds to the pressure outside storage compartment 11 as described in paragraph [0029]) whereby outside air (paragraph [0029]) containing moisture (paragraph [0030]) is introduced into the refrigeration system and then into the interior of the cabinet through the pressure relief valve until the pressure of the interior of the cabinet equalizes with the pressure of the exterior of the cabinet (paragraphs [0029] to [0030]); a baffle (shielding plate 80 Figs. 4-5 and the disclosed “mounting plate” in paragraph [0023]) between the pressure relief valve and the evaporator (Fig. 4 where a portion of rear plate 81 is located between a potion of cooler 26 and pipe 41), the baffle being chilled by the evaporator (paragraphs [0023] and [0030]), the baffle configured to redirect air entering the refrigerated storage through the pressure relief valve so that the air entering the refrigerated storage flows along the baffle in a different direction than the flow direction (paragraph [0030] with Figs. 1 and 4 where the air is flowing in a vertical direction on plate 80) before flowing across the evaporator in the flow direction (referring to paragraph [0023] and Fig. 1, it is understood that when the outside air reaches the disclosed “mounting plate”, it would then flow across a bottom portion of cooler 26 in the same direction as flow A); wherein the refrigeration system comprises an evaporator enclosure (air duct 30 and base 21 Fig. 1) comprising a relief valve support wall (base 21 Fig. 1) on which the pressure relief valve is mounted (Fig. 1), wherein the evaporator is received in the evaporator enclosure (Fig. 1), wherein the baffle is separate from the pressure relief valve and is positioned inside the evaporator enclosure (Figs. 1 and 4), wherein the pressure relief valve comprises an outlet (through-hole 75 Figs. 1 and 7), wherein the baffle comprises a baffle wall (corresponds to the disclosed “mounting plate” in paragraph [0023]) inwardly spaced from the relief valve support wall toward the evaporator and opposing the outlet of the pressure relief valve (referring to paragraph [0023], the disclosed “mounting plate” is understood to be a plate located at the bottom of cooler 26 and connected to both the rear plate 81 and the side plate 82), and wherein the relief valve support wall and the baffle wall define opposite sides of a chamber (corresponds to the top and bottom sides of the chamber formed by base 21, plate 80, and the “mounting plate” disclosed in paragraph [0023]) into which the outlet of the pressure relief valve opens (Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 22, Nishio teaches wherein the chamber is a frosting chamber (paragraph [0030]) cooled by the evaporator (paragraph [0030] and Fig. 4), the frosting chamber comprising a chilled interior frosting surface (corresponds to the surfaces of base 21, plate 80, and mounting plate that face cooler 26 Figs. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 23, Nishio teaches wherein the baffle wall comprises an end plate (the “mounting plate” disclosed in paragraph [0023] is understood to be an end plate since it is provided at the lower edge of side plate 82) on the evaporator (paragraph [0023]) and wherein the baffle further comprises a metal span wall (rear plate 81 and side plate 82 Fig. 5) extending from the end plate to the relief valve support wall (Fig. 1 and paragraph [0023] where plate 80 is described as having the same height than cooler 26).
Regarding claim 31, Nishio teaches wherein the baffle is configured to deflect the outside air between opposing chilled surfaces of the chamber (paragraph [0030] where the opposing chilled surfaces correspond to the surfaces of base 21 and the disclosed “mounting plate” facing cooler 26 Fig. 4) to create turbulence (paragraph [0030]) that promotes freezing of the moisture from the outside air on the chilled surfaces (paragraph [0030]).
Regarding claim 32, Nishio teaches wherein the chamber and the evaporator are configured so that a majority of the moisture (paragraph [0030]) in the outside air entering through the pressure relief valve freezes within the refrigeration system before the outside air enters the interior of the cabinet (paragraph [0030]).
Regarding claim 35, Nishio teaches wherein the refrigeration system further comprises a defrost heater (defrost heater 28 Fig. 3) and an evaporator drain pan (air duct 30 Fig. 1 and paragraph [0014]), the evaporator drain pan including a first section (corresponds to the section of air duct 30 located below cooler 26 Figs. 1 and 3) below the evaporator (Figs. 1 and 3) and a second section (corresponds to the section of air duct 30 located below plate 80 Figs. 1 and 3) below the chamber (Figs. 1 and 3).
Regarding claim 36, Nishio teaches wherein the refrigeration system is configured to periodically execute a defrost cycle (corresponds to the disclosed “defrost operations” in paragraph [0014]) during which the defrost heater melts frost formed on the evaporator and frost formed on the baffle (paragraph [0014]), and wherein the evaporator drain pan is configured to receive moisture (corresponds to the disclosed “melted defrost water” in paragraph [0014]) melting from the evaporator and the baffle during the defrost cycle (paragraph [0014]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 25-28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishio.
Regarding claim 25, Nishio teaches wherein the baffle comprises a span wall (rear plate 81 and side plate 82 Fig. 5) extending between the relief valve support wall and the baffle wall (paragraph [0023] and Fig. 4), and wherein the chamber comprises an open side outlet (corresponds to the cut-out portion of rear plate 81 Fig. 4).
Nishio teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the open side outlet opposite the span wall”.
However, Applicant has not disclosed that having “the open side outlet opposite the span wall” does anything more than produce the predictable result of providing a baffle that allows freezing of the moisture contained in the incoming outside air on its surfaces and airflow towards the evaporator. Since it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI. C, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to modify the apparatus of Nishio and meet the claimed limitations in order to produce the predictable results of providing a baffle that allows freezing of the moisture contained in the incoming outside air on its surfaces and airflow towards the evaporator.
Regarding claim 26, Nishio teaches wherein the chamber comprises an open side outlet (corresponds to the cut-out portion of rear plate 81 Fig. 4).
Nishio teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the open side outlet located at an upstream end of the chamber relative to the flow direction across the evaporator”.
However, Applicant has not disclosed that having “the open side outlet located at an upstream end of the chamber relative to the flow direction across the evaporator” does anything more than produce the predictable result of providing a baffle that allows freezing of the moisture contained in the incoming outside air on its surfaces and airflow towards the evaporator. Since it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI. C, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to modify the apparatus of Nishio and meet the claimed limitations in order to produce the predictable results of providing a baffle that allows freezing of the moisture contained in the incoming outside air on its surfaces and airflow towards the evaporator.
Regarding claim 27, Nishio teaches wherein the pressure relief valve defines a flow axis (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio) along which the outside air enters the chamber (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio), and wherein the baffle is configured to redirect the outside air transversely to the flow axis (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio) toward an open side outlet of the chamber (corresponds to the cut-out portion of rear plate 81 Fig. 4).
PNG
media_image1.png
610
731
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Nishio teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the baffle is configured to thereafter reverse the outside air toward the evaporator for flow across the evaporator in the flow direction”.
However, Applicant has not disclosed that having “the baffle is configured to thereafter reverse the outside air toward the evaporator for flow across the evaporator in the flow direction” does anything more than produce the predictable result of providing a baffle that allows freezing of the moisture contained in the incoming outside air on its surfaces and airflow towards the evaporator. Since it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI. C, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to modify the apparatus of Nishio and meet the claimed limitations in order to produce the predictable results of providing a baffle that allows freezing of the moisture contained in the incoming outside air on its surfaces and airflow towards the evaporator.
Regarding claim 28, Nishio teaches wherein the evaporator comprises an evaporator coil (cooler 26 Fig. 3) having a coil height (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio) and a coil depth (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio), and wherein the pressure relief valve defines a flow axis (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio).
PNG
media_image2.png
578
806
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Nishio teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the flow axis intersects a lower half of the coil height and an upstream half of the coil depth”.
However, Applicant has not disclosed that having “the flow axis intersects a lower half of the coil height and an upstream half of the coil depth” does anything more than produce the predictable result of providing a baffle that allows freezing of the moisture contained in the incoming outside air on its surfaces and airflow towards the evaporator. Since it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI. C, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to modify the apparatus of Nishio and meet the claimed limitations in order to produce the predictable results of providing a baffle that allows freezing of the moisture contained in the incoming outside air on its surfaces and airflow towards the evaporator.
Regarding claim 30, Nishio teaches wherein the evaporator comprises an evaporator coil (cooler 26 Fig. 3) having a coil height (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio) and a coil depth (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio), and wherein the chamber has a chamber height (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio) at least equal to the coil height (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio) and a chamber depth (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio).
PNG
media_image3.png
384
808
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Nishio teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the chamber depth at least equal to the coil depth”.
However, Applicant has not disclosed that having “the chamber depth at least equal to the coil depth” does anything more than produce the predictable result of providing a baffle that allows all the incoming outside air to flow over the evaporator based on whether the evaporator is installed horizontally or vertically. Since it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI. C, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to modify the apparatus of Nishio and meet the claimed limitations in order to produce the predictable results of providing a baffle that allows all the incoming outside air to flow over the evaporator based on whether the evaporator is installed horizontally or vertically.
Claims 24-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishio in view of Wilson et al. (US 20180120017 A1, herein after referred to as Wilson).
Regarding claim 24, Nishio teaches wherein the relief valve support wall comprises an insulation panel (base 21 Fig. 3 and paragraph [0011]) and a liner (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio) defining an interior surface of the evaporator enclosure (Figs. 3-4), wherein the liner and the baffle wall define the opposite sides of the chamber (Fig. 3), and wherein the baffle further comprises a metal span wall (rear plate 81 and side plate 82 Fig. 5) defining a third side of the chamber (corresponds to the rear and lateral sides of the chamber formed by base 21, plate 80, and the “mounting plate” disclosed in paragraph [0023]) transverse to the opposite sides (Fig. 4).
PNG
media_image4.png
362
969
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Nishio teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “wherein the liner is a sheet metal liner”.
However, Wilson teaches wherein a liner (floor 72 Fig. 4 corresponds to the liner of Nishio) is a sheet metal liner (paragraph [0057]) to provide a high strength material (paragraph [0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Nishio to include “wherein the liner is a sheet metal liner” in view of the teachings of Wilson to provide a high strength material.
Regarding claim 29, Nishio teaches wherein the relief valve support wall comprises a liner (see below annotated Fig. 3 of Nishio), the baffle wall comprises a metal end plate (the “mounting plate” disclosed in paragraph [0023] is understood to be an end plate since it is provided at the lower edge of side plate 82) on the evaporator (paragraph [0023]) and the baffle further comprises a metal span wall (rear plate 81 and side plate 82 Fig. 5) extending between the liner and the metal end plate (Fig. 3), the liner, the metal end plate, and the metal span wall defining respective portions of a chilled interior frosting surface of the chamber (corresponds to the surfaces of base 21, plate 80, and mounting plate that face cooler 26 Figs. 1 and 4).
PNG
media_image5.png
362
969
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Nishio teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the liner is a metal liner”.
However, Wilson teaches a liner (floor 72 Fig. 4 corresponds to the liner of Nishio) is a metal liner (paragraph [0057]) to provide a high strength material (paragraph [0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Nishio to include “the liner is a metal liner” in view of the teachings of Wilson to provide a high strength material.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishio in view of Deng et al. (CN216897960U, herein after referred to as Deng).
Regarding claim 33, Nishio teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “wherein the pressure relief valve comprises an electrical resistance valve heater in thermal communication with a valve passage of the pressure relief valve and configured to inhibit frost formation inside the pressure relief valve”.
However, Deng teaches wherein a pressure relief valve (one-way valve 31 Fig. 3 corresponds to the pressure relief valve of Nishio) comprises an electrical resistance valve heater (heating element 32 Fig. 3 and paragraph [53]) in thermal communication with a valve passage of the pressure relief valve (corresponds to the passage formed by the disclosed “inlet” and “outlet” of one-way valve 31 in paragraph [51]) and configured to inhibit frost formation (corresponds to the disclosed “condensation and cold bridging” in paragraph [52]) inside the pressure relief valve (paragraph [52]) to avoid the risk of failure of the valve (paragraph [52]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Nishio to include “wherein the pressure relief valve comprises an electrical resistance valve heater in thermal communication with a valve passage of the pressure relief valve and configured to inhibit frost formation inside the pressure relief valve” in view of the teachings of Deng to avoid the risk of failure of the valve.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishio in view of Wu et al. (CN217081575U, herein after referred to as Wu).
Regarding claim 34, Nishio teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “wherein the pressure relief valve comprises a valve heater configured to operate continuously or according to a selectable duty cycle independent of a defrost cycle of the evaporator”.
However, Wu teaches wherein a pressure relief valve (the device illustrated in Fig. 1 corresponds to the pressure relief valve of Nishio) comprises a valve heater (heating module 80 Fig. 2) configured to operate continuously (paragraph [46]) to quickly eliminate frosting and freezing (paragraph [46]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Nishio to include “wherein the pressure relief valve comprises a valve heater configured to operate continuously or according to a selectable duty cycle independent of a defrost cycle of the evaporator” in view of the teachings of Wu to quickly eliminate frosting and freezing.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cartwright (US 20210104108 A1), in view of Kaga et al. (US 20080163632 A1, herein after referred to as Kaga), and in further view of Nishio.
Regarding claim 15, Cartwright teaches a method (the method illustrated in Fig. 9) of equipping a refrigerated storage device cabinet (locker bank 10 Fig. 5) having an interior (compartments 12 Figs. 5 and 9) and an exterior (corresponds to the exterior of locker bank 10 Fig. 5) with pressure equalization capacity (paragraph [0113]), the method comprising: providing a plurality of refrigeration systems (storage spaces 2 Figs. 5 and 9, and referring to paragraph [0112] it is disclosed that each storage space 2 is provided with an air conditioner 22), each of the plurality of refrigeration systems comprising a pressure relief valve (disclosed “pressure equalization valve” in paragraph [0113]) configured to automatically open in response to a pressure differential (understood to be the pressure difference between the pressure inside compartment 12 and ambient pressure as described in paragraph [0113]) across the pressure relief valve (paragraph [0113]); whereby the pressure relief valves of the plurality of refrigeration systems equalize the pressure of the interior of the refrigerated storage device cabinet with the pressure of the exterior of the refrigerated storage device cabinet (paragraph [0113]).
Cartwright teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the method comprising: providing a plurality of pairs of supply air inlets and return air outlets in the refrigerated storage device cabinet; the plurality of refrigeration systems is a plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems configured to operatively connect to the refrigerated storage device cabinet for cooling the interior”.
However, Kaga teaches a method (the method illustrated in Fig. 2 corresponds to the method of Cartwright) comprising: providing a plurality of pairs of supply air inlets (suction port 24 Figs. 2 and 4) and return air outlets (discharge port 26 Figs. 2 and 4) in a refrigerated storage device cabinet (Figs. 2 and 4 where main body 10 corresponds to the refrigerated storage device cabinet of Cartwright); a plurality of refrigeration systems (cooling units 30 Fig. 2 correspond to the plurality of refrigeration systems of Cartwright) is a plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems (Fig. 2 where cooling units 30 are illustrated as modular units) configured to operatively connect to the refrigerated storage device cabinet for cooling the interior (paragraph [0044]) to account for different cooling capacity requirements (paragraph [0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of Cartwright to include “the method comprising: providing a plurality of pairs of supply air inlets and return air outlets in the refrigerated storage device cabinet; the plurality of refrigeration systems is a plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems configured to operatively connect to the refrigerated storage device cabinet for cooling the interior” in view of the teachings of Kaga to account for different cooling capacity requirements.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the method comprising: installing each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems on the refrigerated storage device cabinet such that each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems is configured to cool the interior and such that the pressure relief valve of each of the prefabricated refrigeration systems is configured to open in response to a pressure of the interior of the refrigerated storage device cabinet being less than a pressure of the exterior of the refrigerated storage device cabinet, wherein each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems comprises an evaporator enclosure including a relief valve support wall on which the pressure relief valve is mounted, wherein each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems comprises an evaporator received in the evaporator enclosure, wherein each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems further comprises a baffle separate from the pressure relief valve and positioned inside the evaporator enclosure, wherein the pressure relief valve of each of the prefabricated refrigeration systems comprises an outlet; wherein the baffle of each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems is inwardly spaced from the relief valve support wall toward the evaporator and opposes the outlet of the pressure relief valve, and wherein the relief valve support wall and a baffle wall define opposite sides of a chamber into which the outlet of the pressure relief valve opens”.
However, Nishio teaches a method (the method illustrated in Fig. 1 corresponds to the method of Cartwright) comprising: installing each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems (Fig. 1 where refrigeration unit 23 corresponds to each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems of Kaga) on a refrigerated storage device cabinet (Fig. 1 where refrigerator body 10 corresponds to the refrigerated storage device cabinet of Cartwright) such that each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems is configured to cool an interior (paragraph [0013] and Fig. 1 where storage compartment 11 corresponds to the interior of the cabinet of Cartwright) and such that a pressure relief valve of each of the prefabricated refrigeration systems (air intake pipe 41 Figs. 1 and 6 corresponds to pressure relief valve of each refrigeration system of Cartwright) is configured to open in response to a pressure of the interior of the refrigerated storage device cabinet (corresponds to the pressure inside storage compartment 11 as described in paragraph [0029]) being less than a pressure of the exterior of the refrigerated storage device cabinet (corresponds to the pressure outside storage compartment 11 as described in paragraph [0029]), wherein each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems comprises an evaporator enclosure (air duct 30 and base 21 Fig. 1) including a relief valve support wall (base 21 Fig. 1) on which the pressure relief valve is mounted (Fig. 1), wherein each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems comprises an evaporator (cooler 26 Fig. 1) received in the evaporator enclosure (Fig. 1), wherein each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems further comprises a baffle (shielding plate 80 Figs. 4-5 and the disclosed “mounting plate” in paragraph [0023]) separate from the pressure relief valve and positioned inside the evaporator enclosure (Fig. 1), wherein the pressure relief valve of each of the prefabricated refrigeration systems comprises an outlet (through-hole 75 Figs. 1 and 7); wherein the baffle of each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems is inwardly spaced from the relief valve support wall toward the evaporator and opposes the outlet of the pressure relief valve (referring to paragraph [0023], the disclosed “mounting plate” is understood to be a plate located at the bottom of cooler 26 and connected to both the rear plate 81 and the side plate 82), and wherein the relief valve support wall and a baffle wall (corresponds to the disclosed “mounting plate” in paragraph [0023]) define opposite sides of a chamber (corresponds to the top and bottom sides of the chamber formed by base 21, plate 80, and the “mounting plate” disclosed in paragraph [0023]) into which the outlet of the pressure relief valve opens (Figs. 1 and 4) to prevent moisture from outside air to enter the interior of the cabinet (paragraph [0030]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of the combined teachings to include “the method comprising: installing each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems on the refrigerated storage device cabinet such that each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems is configured to cool the interior and such that the pressure relief valve of each of the prefabricated refrigeration systems is configured to open in response to a pressure of the interior of the refrigerated storage device cabinet being less than a pressure of the exterior of the refrigerated storage device cabinet, wherein each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems comprises an evaporator enclosure including a relief valve support wall on which the pressure relief valve is mounted, wherein each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems comprises an evaporator received in the evaporator enclosure, wherein each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems further comprises a baffle separate from the pressure relief valve and positioned inside the evaporator enclosure, wherein the pressure relief valve of each of the prefabricated refrigeration systems comprises an outlet; wherein the baffle of each of the plurality of prefabricated refrigeration systems is inwardly spaced from the relief valve support wall toward the evaporator and opposes the outlet of the pressure relief valve, and wherein the relief valve support wall and a baffle wall define opposite sides of a chamber into which the outlet of the pressure relief valve opens” in view of the teachings of Nishio to prevent moisture from outside air to enter the interior of the cabinet.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 SAMBA NMN GAYE whose telephone number is (571)272-8809. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 4:30AM to 2:30PM.
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.
/SAMBA NMN GAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights