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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species C, claims 1-4 and 11-13 in the reply filed on 7/15/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 5-10 and 14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/15/2026.
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) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vandermeulen (US 20140150481) in view of Ge et al (US 20240353154).
Regarding claim 1, Vandermeulen teaches a chiller system (fig. 5), comprising: a heat and mass exchanger (607) configured to: dehumidify a flow of air (SA, drier, paragraph 0025); and provide the dehumidified flow of air to a cooling tower (403); and a desiccant regenerator (610) in fluid communication with the heat and mass exchanger (fig. 5), the regenerator configured to provide concentrated liquid desiccant (611) to the heat and mass exchanger for dehumidifying the flow of air (paragraph 0025) but fails to explicitly teach an electrically driven desiccant regenerator.
However, Ge teaches an electrically driven desiccant regenerator (136) to efficiently use waste heat.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the chiller system of Vandermeulen to include an electrically driven desiccant regenerator in view of the teachings of Ge to efficiently use waste heat.
Regarding claim 11, the combined teachings teach the electrically driven desiccant regenerator is configured to: receive warm water from a structure (402 of Vandermeulen), and pre-heat scavenging air entering the electrically driven desiccant regenerator (OA, fig. 5 of Vandermeulen).
Regarding claim 13, it is noted that although the preamble of claim 13 is directed towards a method, the structure of the combined teachings disclose all the structure being provided in the method steps, thus the method is also anticipated by the combined teachings. 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 or obviously perform the claimed process. Thus, the method, as claimed, would necessarily result from the normal operation of the apparatus. See MPEP 2112.02.
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vandermeulen (US 20140150481) in view of Ge et al (US 20240353154) as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Sines et al (US 20100090356).
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach a liquid desiccant reservoir, wherein: the liquid desiccant reservoir is in fluid communication with the electrically driven desiccant regenerator and the heat and mass exchanger; the electrically driven desiccant regenerator is configured to provide the concentrated liquid desiccant to the liquid desiccant reservoir; and the heat and mass exchanger is configured to receive the concentrated liquid desiccant from the liquid desiccant reservoir.
However, Sines teaches a liquid desiccant reservoir (125), wherein: the liquid desiccant reservoir is in fluid communication with the electrically driven desiccant regenerator (137, corresponds to 610 of Vandermeulen) and the heat and mass exchanger (129, corresponds to 607 of Vandermeulen); the electrically driven desiccant regenerator is configured to provide the concentrated liquid desiccant to the liquid desiccant reservoir (fig. 1); and the heat and mass exchanger is configured to receive the concentrated liquid desiccant from the liquid desiccant reservoir (arrow from 125) to provide efficient desiccant humidity control.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the chiller system of the combined teachings to include a liquid desiccant reservoir, wherein: the liquid desiccant reservoir is in fluid communication with the electrically driven desiccant regenerator and the heat and mass exchanger; the electrically driven desiccant regenerator is configured to provide the concentrated liquid desiccant to the liquid desiccant reservoir; and the heat and mass exchanger is configured to receive the concentrated liquid desiccant from the liquid desiccant reservoir in view of the teachings of Sines to provide efficient desiccant humidity control.
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach the liquid desiccant reservoir is configured to receive diluted liquid desiccant from the heat and mass exchanger (arrow into 129 of Sines); and the electrically driven desiccant regenerator is configured to receive the diluted liquid desiccant from the liquid desiccant reservoir (arrow from 129 to 137 of Sines).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach the cooling tower is configured to release hot water to fall down through a cavity of the cooling tower (arrow from 137 to 127 of Sines), and wherein the dehumidified air cools the hot water as the hot water falls down through the cavity to provide cooled water (paragraph 0029 of Sines).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vandermeulen (US 20140150481) in view of Ge et al (US 20240353154) as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Wilkinson (US 4905479).
Regarding claim 12, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach an indirect evaporative cooler in fluid communication with the heat and mass exchanger and the cooling tower, wherein the indirect evaporative cooler is configured to: receive the dehumidified flow of air from the heat and mass exchanger; cool the dehumidified flow of air; and provide the cooled and dehumidified flow of air to the cooling tower.
However, Wilkinson teaches an indirect evaporative cooler (17) in fluid communication with the heat and mass exchanger (15) and the cooling tower (understood 17 is capable of being in communication with 403 of Vandermeulen), wherein the indirect evaporative cooler is configured to: receive the dehumidified flow of air from the heat and mass exchanger (fig. 3); cool the dehumidified flow of air; and provide the cooled and dehumidified flow of air to the cooling tower (fig. 3) to efficiently effect temperature change.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the chiller system of the combined teachings to include an indirect evaporative cooler in fluid communication with the heat and mass exchanger and the cooling tower, wherein the indirect evaporative cooler is configured to: receive the dehumidified flow of air from the heat and mass exchanger; cool the dehumidified flow of air; and provide the cooled and dehumidified flow of air to the cooling tower in view of the teachings of Wilkinson to efficiently effect temperature change.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3840. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-3:00 CT pm M-F.
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.
/ELIZABETH J MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights