DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-9, 11, 12-15, 17-18, 20, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Holsapple (US 10087883).
Regarding claim 1,
Holsapple teaches a stirling cycle machine (see abstract) comprising: a thermal energy exchange apparatus including: a first side plate (e.g. a side plates of the heater head 3, see Fig. 11, not labeled) having a plurality of first side pins 31 extending therefrom; a second side plate 43 having a plurality of second side pins 41 extending toward the plurality of first side pins; and a combination regenerator/displacer 2/5 positioned between the first side plate and the second side plate, the combination regenerator/displacer including a plurality of pin openings 21, each pin opening surrounding a first side pin and a corresponding second side pin (see col 4, lines 28-33); wherein the combination regenerator/displacer is configured to be driven in a first direction toward the first side plate and in a second direction toward the second side plate (see col 5, lines 47-67), the motion of the combination regenerator/displacer driving displacement of a working fluid in flow communication with the combination regenerator/displacer, the first side pins and the second side pins, to urge a thermal energy exchange between the first side pins and the second side pins via the working fluid (see col 6, line 50 – col 7, line 21).
Regarding claim 2,
Holsapple teaches an actuator 10 operably connected to the combination regenerator/displacer to drive the motion of the combination regenerator between the first side plate and the second side plate.
Regarding claim 3,
Holsapple teaches wherein the actuator is a voice coil actuator 9.
Regarding claim 4,
Holsapple teaches a displacer shaft 8 operably connecting the actuator to the combined regenerator/displacer.
Regarding claim 5,
Holsapple teaches wherein the displacer shaft is disposed at a central axis of the thermal energy exchange apparatus (wherein the axis of the thermal energy exchange apparatus is defined in relation to the displacer shaft 8).
Regarding claim 7,
Holsapple teaches wherein the first side pins and the second side pins each have a circular cross-sectional shape.
Regarding claim 8,
Holsapple teaches wherein the combined regenerator/displacer is a unitary structure including a body having the plurality of pin openings formed therein.
Regarding claim 9,
Holsapple teaches wherein the first side is defined as a hot side and the second side is defined as a cold side.
Regarding claim 11,
Holsapple teaches wherein the first side pins, the second side pins, and the combined regenerator/displacer are disposed in a common housing 1.
Regarding claims 12-15, 17-18, 20,
If a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated or rendered obvious by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. Thus, the method, as claimed, would necessarily result from the normal operation of the apparatus. See MPEP 2112.02.
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.
Claim(s) 6, 10, 16, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holsapple
Regarding claim 6,
Holsapple does not teach an insulator disposed between each first side pin and the corresponding second side pin, but the examiner takes official notice that the use of, and advantage of, insulators would be well known to one of ordinary skill in the art; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Holsapple to comprise an insulator disposed between each first side pin and the corresponding second side pin with the motivation of, for example, preventing heat conduction (aka heat loss) between the first and second side pins.
Regarding claim 10,
Holsapple teaches a bellows assembly 200 to one or more of add energy to the stirling cycle machine or remove energy from the stirling cycle machine but does not teach a power piston operably connected to the thermal energy exchange apparatus to one or more of add energy to the stirling cycle machine or remove energy from the stirling cycle machine. However, the examiner takes official notice that the use of, and advantages of, a power piston within a stirling cycle machine would be well known to one of ordinary skill in the art; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Holsapple to comprise a power piston operably connected to the thermal energy exchange apparatus to one or more of add energy to the stirling cycle machine or remove energy from the stirling cycle machine with the motivation of, for example, compressing the working fluid.
Regarding claims 16, 19,
If a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated or rendered obvious by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. Thus, the method, as claimed, would necessarily result from the normal operation of the apparatus. See MPEP 2112.02.
Conclusion
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Minale teaches the use of stirling cycle apparatus, including power pistons.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVE S TANENBAUM whose telephone number is (313)446-6522. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11 AM - 7 PM.
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.
/Steve S TANENBAUM/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights