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 § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lillie (US 2017/0074557) in view of Ban (US 6,250,094).
As to claim 1, Lillie teaches a pressure relief arrangement in a refrigerant circuit (paragraph 2) comprising:
a high-pressure side 8; and
a low-pressure side 9;
wherein the high pressure side 8 is fluidically connected with the low-pressure side 9 via an pressure relief valve 3, wherein the valve 3 provides for pressure reduction of overpressure in case of an overpressure on the high-pressure side 8, and fluid flows from the high-pressure side 8 to the low-pressure side 9 of the refrigerant circuit;
wherein the valve 3 is arranged in a pressure relief channel 11 between the high and low pressure sides; and
wherein an opening of the valve 3 achieves pressure equilibrium between the high and low pressure sides through a fluid connection therebetween (paragraph 35).
Lillie is silent regarding the specific construction of the pressure relief valve 3. However, Ban teaches that it is known to use a pressure relief valve with a valve body 197a having an overflow channel 196 which runs axially in the valve body 197a (Fig. 4). As such it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Lillie to incorporate a valve construction as claimed and taught by Ban in order to effectively equalize the pressure between the high and low sides.
As to claim 2, the valve 3 of Lillie prevents undesirable operation conditions (paragraphs 4-7) and thus is considered to be a safety valve.
As to claim 3, the valve 3 of Lillie connects a high pressure side component with a low pressure side component (Figs. 1-3).
As to claim 5, Lillie teaches embodiments wherein the pressure relief channel is formed inside a housing of a compressor (Figs. 1-2).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lillie and Ban as applied above, and further in view of Kosarzecki (US 4,653,527).
As to claim 6, Lillie is silent regarding the manner in which the valve 3 is mounted into the compressor housing. However, Kosarzecki teaches that it is known to screw a pressure relief valve into a housing (col. 3, lines 9-13). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the valve 3 of Lillie such that it is screwed into the housing as claimed and taught by Kosarzecki in order to provide convenience of construction of the apparatus.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 4, filed 8/5/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Said rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-8, filed, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Lillie (US 2017/0074557) as discussed in the rejections above.
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 JONATHAN BRADFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-5199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:00 ET.
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.
/JONATHAN BRADFORD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights