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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/2/2024, 1/30/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the application on 11/29/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a refrigeration unit” in claim 12 and “a heating unit” in claim 14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "a refrigeration unit" which has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as set forth above. However, since the specification does not clearly describe the corresponding of the limitation as required under that statute, Applicant has failed to demonstrate full possession of the metes and bounds of the claimed invention at the effective filing date of the application.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "a heating unit" which has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as set forth above. However, since the specification does not clearly describe the corresponding of the limitation as required under that statute, Applicant has failed to demonstrate full possession of the metes and bounds of the claimed invention at the effective filing date of the application.
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 10-15 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 10 recites “a thermostatic assembly” which lacks antecedent basis with claim 1. For examination purposes, the limitation is interpreted to recite -- the thermostatic assembly --.
Claim 15 recites “a thermostatic assembly as in claim 9, wherein the consumer heat exchanger” which renders the claim indefinite because it’s unclear if the thermostatic assembly if the same thermostatic assembly or a different one. Additionally claim 9 fails to recites a consumer heat exchanger. For examination purposes, claim 15 is interpreted to depend from claim 10 and recite -- the thermostatic assembly --.
Claim limitation “a refrigeration unit” in claim 12 and “a heating unit” in claim 14 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 11-13 are rejected based on dependency from claim rejected claim.
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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al (US 20240295330) in view of Piesker (US 20140090407).
Regarding claim 1, Zhao teaches a buffer storage (9) for a cooling circuit (circuit of 2) of a thermostatic assembly (2), comprising: a tank (exterior of 9) having a tank wall (walls of 9) encompassing an interior volume (interior of 9), a heat exchanger (6), disposed within the interior volume of the tank (fig. 1), the heat exchanger comprising: a first side with a first intake (from 4 to 9) and a first discharge (from 9 to 7) for a first coolant (14) , and a second side (connected with 10) with a second intake (through into 9 through 24, fig. 2) and a second discharge (arrow into 11 through 24, fig. 2) for a second coolant (15) but fails to explicitly teach a second side, separated from the first side by a diathermic wall, a first tubeline guided from an exterior volume outside of the tank through the tank wall to the first intake, a second tubeline guided from the first discharge through the tank wall toward the exterior volume outside of the tank, a third tubeline guided from the exterior volume outside of the tank through the tank wall to the second intake, a fourth tubeline connected across a T-fitting with the second discharge, wherein the forth tubeline terminates into the interior volume of the tank, a fifth tubeline guided through the tank wall toward the exterior volume outside of the tank, and a sixth tubeline guided from the interior volume of the tank through the tank wall toward the exterior volume outside of the tank.
However, Piesker teaches a tank (12, 14) having a second side (fig. 5), separated from the first side by a diathermic wall (fig. 5 walls of 12 separated from 14 with outer wall 24), a first tubeline (outer 16/18) guided from an exterior volume (fig. 5) outside of the tank through the tank wall to the first intake (16/18), a second tubeline (outer 18/16) guided from the first discharge through the tank wall toward the exterior volume outside of the tank (fig. 5), a third tubeline (30/26) guided from the exterior volume outside of the tank through the tank wall to the second intake (fig. 5), a fourth tubeline (32/26) connected across a T-fitting (34/40) with the second discharge, wherein the forth tubeline terminates into the interior volume of the tank (fig. 5), a fifth tubeline (outer part 26/30) guided through the tank wall toward the exterior volume outside of the tank (fig. 5), and a sixth tubeline (36/32) guided from the interior volume of the tank through the tank wall toward the exterior volume outside of the tank (fig. 5) to provide a multifunctional refrigerant container that is suitable in particular for use in a cooling system designed for operation with a two-phase refrigerant.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the buffer storage of Zhao to include a second side, separated from the first side by a diathermic wall, a first tubeline guided from an exterior volume outside of the tank through the tank wall to the first intake, a second tubeline guided from the first discharge through the tank wall toward the exterior volume outside of the tank, a third tubeline guided from the exterior volume outside of the tank through the tank wall to the second intake, a fourth tubeline connected across a T-fitting with the second discharge, wherein the forth tubeline terminates into the interior volume of the tank, a fifth tubeline guided through the tank wall toward the exterior volume outside of the tank, and a sixth tubeline guided from the interior volume of the tank through the tank wall toward the exterior volume outside of the tank in view of the teachings of Piesker to provide a multifunctional refrigerant container that is suitable in particular for use in a cooling system designed for operation with a two-phase refrigerant.
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach the T fitting is a three-way valve (fig. 5 of Piesker illustrates 34 and 40 as three-way).
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach the sixth tubeline comprises an intake end (fig. 5 of Piesker), disposed in the interior volume of the tank (fig. 5 of Piesker), which is disposed in the interior volume in a top region of the tank (32/36 of Piesker).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach the fourth tubeline comprises a discharge end disposed in the interior volume of the tank (fig. 5 of Piesker).
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings teach in the interior volume of the tank a perforated sheet (bottom of 12 with pipes passing through, fig. 5 of Piesker) is disposed in the bottom region of the tank (fig. 5 of Piesker).
Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings teach the discharge end of the fourth tubeline is disposed between the perforated sheet and the bottom wall of the tank (fig. 5 of Piesker).
Regarding claim 7, the combined teachings teach the fifth tubeline and the sixth tubeline terminate with respective discharge ends terminating into a second T fitting (fig. 5 of Piesker).
Regarding claim 8, the combined teachings teach the second T fitting is a three-way valve (fig. 5 of Piesker illustrates 34 and 40 as three-way).
Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach the heat exchanger is a plate heat exchanger (fig. 5 of Piesker) or a coaxial tube heat exchanger (fig. 1 of Zhao).
Claim(s) 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al (US 20240295330) in view of Piesker (US 20140090407) as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Hombuecher (DE 102004040737).
Regarding claim 10, Zhao teaches wherein the thermostatic assembly comprises a buffer storage as in claim 1 (see claim 1), wherein the second side of the heat exchanger disposed in the buffer storage forms the cold source (6) and the first side of the heat exchanger disposed in the buffer storage is a portion of an external refrigerant circuit (connected with 2) but fails to explicitly teach a thermostatic assembly with a cooling circuit with a coolant, wherein the cooling circuit comprises a cold source, a consumer heat exchanger in the return of the cold source and a circulation pump, wherein between the return of the cold source and the forerun of the consumer heat exchanger a first three-way junction is disposed and between the return of the consumer heat exchanger and the forerun of the cold source a second three-way junction is disposed, wherein the first three-way junction and the second three-way junction are connected with a bypass line and the circulation pump is disposed either between the first three-way junction and the forerun of the consumer heat exchanger or between the return of the consumer heat exchanger and the second three-way junction.
However, Hombuecher teaches a thermostatic assembly (fig. 1) with a cooling circuit (12) with a coolant (coolant within 12), wherein the cooling circuit comprises a cold source (2), a consumer heat exchanger (4) in the return of the cold source and a circulation pump (1), wherein between the return of the cold source and the forerun of the consumer heat exchanger a first three-way junction (5) is disposed and between the return of the consumer heat exchanger and the forerun of the cold source a second three-way junction (3) is disposed, wherein the first three-way junction and the second three-way junction are connected with a bypass line (10.4) and the circulation pump is disposed either between the first three-way junction and the forerun of the consumer heat exchanger (fig. 1) to ensure flow temperature and /or the cooling/heating circuit safe from overshooting the permissible and to protect high pressure and an overload to safely prevent the compressor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the buffer storage of the combined teachings to include a thermostatic assembly with a cooling circuit with a coolant, wherein the cooling circuit comprises a cold source, a consumer heat exchanger in the return of the cold source and a circulation pump, wherein between the return of the cold source and the forerun of the consumer heat exchanger a first three-way junction is disposed and between the return of the consumer heat exchanger and the forerun of the cold source a second three-way junction is disposed, wherein the first three-way junction and the second three-way junction are connected with a bypass line and the circulation pump is disposed either between the first three-way junction and the forerun of the consumer heat exchanger or between the return of the consumer heat exchanger and the second three-way junction in view of the teachings of Hombuecher to ensure flow temperature and /or the cooling/heating circuit safe from overshooting the permissible and to protect high pressure and an overload to safely prevent the compressor.
Regarding claim 11, the combined teachings teach an intake opening of the third tubeline is connected with an outlet of the second three-way junction (fig. 5 of Piesker) and that the discharge opening of the fifth tubeline and the discharge opening of the sixth tubeline terminate into a second T fitting (fig. 5 of Piesker) whose outlet is connected with an inlet of the first three-way junction (fig. 5 of Piesker).
Regarding claim 12, the combined teachings teach the external refrigerant circuit comprises a refrigeration unit (2 of Zhao, 12 of Hombuecher), and the buffer storage is disposed such that the first tubeline is in connection with the return of the refrigeration unit (fig. 5 of Piesker, fig. 1 of Hombuecher) and the second tubeline is in connection with the forerun of the refrigeration unit (fig. 1 of Zhao, fig. 5 of Piesker, fig. 1 of Hombuecher).
Regarding claim 13, the combined teachings teach the first three-way junction and/or the second three-way junction are developed as three-way valves (fig. 5 of Piesker, fig. 1 of Hombuecher).
Regarding claim 14, the combined teachings teach between the first three-way junction and the consumer heat exchanger a heating unit (6 of Hombuecher) is disposed.
Regarding claim 15, the combined teachings teach a laboratory chamber, climate chamber, cold chamber or environment simulation chamber with a sample compartment (understood the consumer 12 of Hombuecher could be one of this chambers with a sample compartment) and the thermostatic assembly as in claim 10, wherein the consumer heat exchanger is disposed such that it maintains temperature control of the sample compartment (fig. 1 of Hombuecher).
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