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 .
Responsive to correspondence
This office action is in response to correspondence filed on 11/04/2024 and preliminary amendment filed on 11/17/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
No IDS was filed.
Abstract
The abstract filed 11/04/2024 appears to be acceptable.
Claim Objections
Following claim(s) are objected to because of antecedent basis and informalities, and for accuracy of the claim languages have been suggested as follows:
Claim 1 lines 7-8 recites “detect a magnitude of imbalance between positive voltage and negative voltage during cycles during operation of a variable-speed fan motor”, this should be read as “detect a magnitude of imbalance between positive voltage and negative voltage during cycles once the variable-speed fan motor is operated”;
Claim 15 lines 3-4 recites “detecting a magnitude of imbalance between positive voltage and negative voltage during cycles during operation of a variable-speed fan motor”, this should be read as “detecting a magnitude of imbalance between positive voltage and negative voltage during cycles once the variable-speed fan motor is operated”;
Claim 27 lines 8-9 recites “detect a magnitude of imbalance between positive voltage and negative voltage during cycles during operation of the variable-speed fan motor”, this should be read as “detect a magnitude of imbalance between positive voltage and negative voltage during cycles once the variable-speed fan motor is operated”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 14, 15, 27, 34, 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Publication number 2005/0163615 A1 to CHHEDA et al. (CHHEDA) in view of U.S Patent number 4361069 to PETERSON et al. (PETERSON).
Re: Claim 1:
CHHEDA discloses:
A system for controlling supplying power to a variable-speed fan motor (See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: discloses a variable-speed fan motor with a control system for power supply to the variable-speed fan motor see claims 11-16 ) , the system comprising:
at least a first sensor (See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: at least first sensor 208), and
a controller (See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: a control system 200 for variable-speed fan motor 201/202 as shown in figure 2),
the sensor senses (See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: sensors 208, 209, which measures fan motor current consumption for each fan motor) at least one characteristic from which voltage can be monitored, and further discloses a variable-speed fan motor,
CHHEDA is silent regarding:
the controller is configured to:
detect a magnitude of imbalance between positive voltage and negative voltage during cycles during operation of a variable-speed fan motor,
compare the detected magnitude of imbalance to a pre-selected threshold value, and if the detected magnitude of imbalance exceeds the pre-selected threshold value, automatically alter one or more characteristics of supplying power to the variable-speed motor.
However, PETERSON teaches:
controller is configured to:
detect a magnitude of imbalance between positive voltage and negative voltage during cycles (See Figs. 3A-3C: col. 6 lines 41-68-col. 7 lines 1- 49: if there is either a positive or a negative imbalance between the cam position sensor voltage and the swell shoe potentiometer voltage, and if the imbalance is greater than the off-set dead-band adjustment voltage, then one or the other of the comparators 106 or 118 will produce a positive voltage at its output) during operation of a variable-speed motor (claim 8 discloses a variable- speed motor),
compare the detected magnitude of imbalance to a pre-selected threshold value, and if the detected magnitude of imbalance exceeds the pre-selected threshold value, automatically alter one or more characteristics of supplying power to the variable-speed fan motor (See Figs. 3A-3C: col. 6 lines 41-68-col. 7 lines 1- 49: …..if there is either a positive or a negative imbalance between the cam position sensor voltage and the swell shoe potentiometer voltage, and if the imbalance is greater than the off-set dead-band adjustment voltage, then one or the other of the comparators 106 or 118 will produce a positive voltage at its output….. ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure control system disclosed by CHHEDA as explicitly taught by PETERSON, because PETERSON teaches the electronic logic circuitry responds to the two input voltages and decides what action to take in the event of an imbalance between the voltages which is beneficial and would have yielded similar advantages in the system of CHHEDA.
Regarding method claim 15: CHHEDA in view of PETERSON discloses all the limitations of method claim 15
Regarding a fan system as claimed in claim 27: CHHEDA in view of PETERSON discloses all the limitations of method claim 27.
Re: Claims 9, 34:
CHHEDA modified by PETERSON discloses:
The system recited in claims 1 and 34, modified CHHEDA discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and claim 27, and wherein:
the controller comprises a processor (CHHEDA: See Figs. 1-4: ¶0013, ¶0028: typically, controllers/control logics comprise a processor), and
the processor is configured to perform said detecting, said comparing and said automatically altering one or more characteristics of supplying power to the variable-speed fan motor if the detected magnitude of imbalance exceeds the pre-selected threshold value (PETERSON: See Fig. 3 col. 6 lines 41-68-col. 7 lines 1- 49: as explained in rejection of claim 1 above).
Re: Claims 14, 39:
CHHEDA modified by PETERSON discloses:
The system recited in claims 1 and 27, modified CHHEDAR discloses all the limitation of claims 1 and 27, and wherein the first sensor is selected from among voltage sensors, current sensors and power sensors (CHHEDAR: See Fis.1-4: ¶0018: current measuring device 205 with sensors 208, 209).
Claim(s) 4, 18 , 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Publication number 2005/0163615 A1 to CHHEDA et al. (CHHEDA) in view of U.S Patent number 4361069 to PETERSON et al. (PETERSON) as applied to claim 1, 15 and 27 above, and further in view of U.S Publication number 2023/0032000 A1 to YANG et a. (YANG).
Re: Claims 4, 18, 40:
CHHEDA modified by PETERSON discloses:
The system recited in claim 1, modified CHHEDA discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and method claim 15, and further teaches wherein:
the system further comprises a variable-speed fan motor (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025 and claims 11-16) , a fan (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: fan motors 201/202, 309/310) and a condenser (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: heat sink 305),
the controller controls power (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: fan motors 201 and 202 are controlled by varying the voltage made available to them by the power control subsystem 203) supplied to the variable-speed fan motor (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: fan motors 201/202, 319/310),
the variable-speed fan motor (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: fan motors 201/202, 319/310) causes the fan (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: fan 311/312) to rotate upon power being supplied to the variable-speed fan motor (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: fan motors 201/202, 319/310),
the fan (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: fan 311/312) is positioned and oriented to blow air toward the condenser (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: condenser 305) coils upon the fan rotating (CHHEDA: See Figs. 2-4: ¶0017-¶0025: fan motors 201/202, 319/310).
Although modified CHHEDA is silent regarding coiled condenser, however employing coiled condensers are well known in the art , such a coiled heat sink/condenser is explicitly taught by U.S Publication number 2023/0032000 A1 to YANG et a. (YANG: See Fig. 1: ¶0050), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ a heat sink/condenser in a coil shape to reduce the temperature of air which would have yielded predictable results in the system of modified CHHEDAR.
Regarding claim 40, the modified CHHEDA discloses all the limitations of base claim 27 and dependent claim 40 as explained in rejection of claim 4 above.
Claim(s) 13 and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Publication number 2005/0163615 A1 to CHHEDA et al. (CHHEDA) in view of U.S Patent number 4361069 to PETERSON et al. (PETERSON) as applied to claim 1 and 27 above, and further in view of U.S Publication number 2012/0086382 A1 to PETO (PETO).
Re: Claims 13, 38:
CHHEDA modified by PETERSON discloses:
The system recited in claims 1 and 27, modified CHHEDA discloses all the limitation of claim 1, the modified CHHEDA is silent regarding wherein said automatically altering one or more characteristics of supplying power to the variable-speed fan motor comprises altering a shape of the waveform.
However, PETO teaches:
wherein said automatically altering one or more characteristics of supplying power to the variable-speed fan motor comprises altering a shape of the waveform (PETO: See Figs.1-2: ¶0054: a motor controller which modifies an input current ,and the motor and a control circuit arranged to control the variable voltage circuit and to provide time varying waveforms to the output circuit) .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure control system disclosed by the modified CHHEDA as explicitly taught by PETO, because PETO teaches that altering voltage/current supply to a motor and control circuit modulates the waveform which is an art known subject matter and would have yielded predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter and Prior Art
Claims 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 11, 12, 16-17, 19, 21, 28-30, 32, 35-37 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAFIQ A MIAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4925. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am to 6:30 pm (Monday thru Thursday).
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, MARK LAURENZI can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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.
/SHAFIQ MIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
December 5, 2025